Is it real or ‘selective’?

PRESIDENT Pervez Musharraf’s call to the world community to return the money earned illegally by some Pakistanis and stashed in foreign banks deserves to be seen in the light of the existing reality. It is true that an unbelievably huge amount of money earned illegally has been transferred abroad. Politicians are generally considered prime suspects in these financial shenanigans. But the truth is that all sections of Pakistan’s elite is involved in corruption in a big way. They include, besides the much-abused politicians, businessmen, civil bureaucrats and military officials. Admiral Mansurul Haq’s case is just one example where, as the National Accountability Bureau claims, the former navy chief had earned through kickbacks a fantastic amount — roughly 3.57 million dollars. Unfortunately, he is not the only military official to have done so, for many others too bear the heavy taint of corruption and now live happily abroad. In the same category are many civil bureaucrats who have remained unexposed and unpunished. Similarly, one also knows how, shortly before the Sharif government froze foreign exchange accounts, many cronies and well-connected persons were allowed to quietly transfer their dollars abroad. They are still here, going scot-free.

The over-publicized cases are, of course, those relating to the Bhutto and Sharif families. Politically, both happen to be on the wrong side of the military government. While the Sharif family was allowed to leave the country under a deal with Saudi Arabia, Benazir moved out before she could be hauled up. However, her husband continues to remain in jail. For his unduly long incarceration, the present government is as much responsible as the Sharif government. At the same time, the process of accountability has come under serious doubt, and people at home and abroad wonder whether some, if not all, corruption charges are politically motivated. In fact, this impression is only strengthened by some of the tell-tale disqualifications and prohibitions that have been recently prescribed in regard to individual and party eligibility for contesting the coming elections in October. This is one reason why foreign governments are reluctant to cooperate with Islamabad in extraditing the suspects or helping with the repatriation of their ill-gotten wealth.

The truth is that the war on corruption is a nation’s internal matter. It does not necessarily take the form of corruption indulged in by Mansurul Haq. Corruption includes massive evasions of taxes by firms in league with corrupt officials — from top downwards; write-offs of bank loans; shenanigans in the privatization process; smuggling that costs the exchequers billions of rupees; over-invoicing and under-invoicing by businessmen; the grant of agricultural and real estate land to selected categories; and the bending of rules in prize appointments and promotions. Also, a most horrendous case of corruption was that of Rs 140 million obtained from the Mehran Bank for distribution among politicians to fix the 1990 general election. Involved in this by his own confession was a serving army chief and some Intelligence services mandarins.

Fighting corruption must be a continuous process. There would be no flight of capital nor transfers of ill-gotten wealth if the avenues of corruption are choked at home effectively enough. Unfortunately, the military governments have always tended to give an impression as if they use the accountability process as a means of persecuting and hounding out certain political personalities. Accountability must have nothing to do with a regime change; nor must it need special courts and special laws to try cases. The existing laws provide sufficient deterrence against corruption; the need is to pursue the war on corruption honestly and on a continuing basis.

Trouble in the Mediterranean

IT was to the credit of France and Italy that they refused to be part of a harsh European Union statement condemning what it termed Morocco’s occupation of a small uninhabited rocky island in the Mediterranean Sea last week. The disputed island is situated some 200 metres from mainland Morocco and lies well within its territorial waters. But it forms part of a larger territorial dispute that has strained relations between Spain and Morocco for a long time. About two dozen Moroccan soldiers were deployed on the island early last week after Spain accused it of not doing enough to control illegal immigrants reaching Spanish shores. The action drew a sharp and hostile response from Spain, whose paramilitary troopers ultimately forced the Moroccan soldiers out of the island and occupied it.

Earlier, the European Commission readily threw its weight behind Spain and demanded an immediate withdrawal of Moroccan soldiers, a move that was half-heartedly supported by the more reasonable members of the EU, including France and Italy, the two former colonial powers which once ruled most of North Africa along with Spain. Not happy with the watered-down EU statement, Spain decided to go it alone soon thereafter, and sent in its troops to evict the handful of Moroccan soldiers. Morocco has since offered to hold talks to decide the fate of the said island and to resolve other disputed issues — an idea to which Spain remains strangely unamenable. Just goes to show how the dictum ‘might is right’ still holds the field even for those who never tire of lecturing the rest of the world on the virtue of resolving all inter-state disputes and differences by peaceful means of negotiations and mediation — and not by resort to military means.

Protecting consumers

SINDH Ombudsman Haziqul Khairi’s observations regarding the helplessness of Pakistani consumers deserve attention. The ombudsman said there were no consumer protection laws in Pakistan in line with international conventions. There, of course, are Pakistani laws dealing with adulterated foods and substandard drugs. But their enforcement is poor. The result is that the market is flooded with impure and counterfeit products. For instance, there are at least 300 brands of cooking oil and bottled water in the market. But a survey done in Karachi showed that, of the 21 samples of bottled water taken, only 11 were found fit for human consumption. A more horrible picture exists with regard to cooking oils. According to lab tests done in Lahore, of the 50 samples, only seven were found fit for home cooking. Similar practices prevail in the case of cold drinks, confectionery items, biscuits, spices, lubricants, synthetic paints and cosmetics where old bottles and rusted tin cans are recycled and passed on to unsuspecting consumers as genuine. Yet there is no law under which a consumer could sue a manufacturer.

Under the existing laws, only food inspectors and government officials concerned can proceed against a given manufacturer. In developed countries, however, every citizen has the right to sue a company if it cheats him by way of supplying substandard or counterfeit products. The ombudsman correctly noted that, while there are monopoly control laws, there is no law to protect the consumer’s interests. Various proposals are afoot. One of them is that not only the consumer protection councils but every citizen should be given the right to have an FIR registered in case he is cheated. One hopes that the seminar where the ombudsman spoke would come up with concrete and practical proposals to make the government enact laws that would ensure the consumer’s rights and check the current flooding of market with counterfeit and substandard products.